Video Game Forums

If you previously registered on VGF XenForo boards, you will need to use the forgot password feature in order to be able to post here. If you do not receive a password reset by e-mail, use the contact page or post in registration/login help.

An archive of the (now deleted) tweets also show the same account posted a picture of a man after a fight, clearly in distress, laying on the ground. The tweet has the caption, “hey come get your boy, he got ROCKED #miloatcal”

Black Bloc protesters also beat a man unconscious:
[video in article]
The anarchist group pepper sprayed an innocent girl in the face:
[video in article]
The group also surrounded people and beat them with flagpoles:
[video in article]

Sleuths on Twitter quickly pointed out that the person behind this @teen_archer account was likely a UC Berkeley staff member named Ian Dabney Miller. Further Daily Caller investigation has confirmed that Ian Miller, a UC Berkeley staffer, is indeed the person behind the @teen_archer account that was bragging about getting into fights with Milo attendees and participating in the riots.

In an interview with SF Weekly, Miller, who plays in the band “Kowloon Walled City,” talks about working at the university, saying, “I work at UC Berkeley in advancement communications. There’s really not much to say about it, frankly. It’s incredibly tedious.” It’s the same Ian Miller as the person behind the @teen_archer account, because an archive of the account @teen_archer has the name listed as “Ian Miller” and a bio that reads:

Most strikingly, he recently gave an interview to the New York Daily News, in which he identified himself as a current Berkeley employee and placed himself directly at the scene, saying, “The fuel started pouring out and they set it on fire,” and, “It got really hot.” Finally, a (now deleted) tweet from @teen_archer was embedded in the NYDN story right after his comments.

A spokesperson for UC Berkeley told TheDC, “We are aware of the allegations involving a member of the University’s workforce. Our campus police force is currently working with the FBI in an ongoing investigation of this matter.”

UC Berkeley gets around $400-450 million in federal funds for research and $216 million in financial aid every year, Reuters reports.

President Donald J. Trump gave his thoughts on the whole Berkeley situation last week:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view - NO FEDERAL FUNDS?

Miller’s involvement with the protests seems to undercut the narrative that the violent riots were somehow an infiltration by secret right wingers in an otherwise peaceful protest to make the left look bad. Berkeley professor Robert Reich promoted this conspiracy theory, insinuating that Breitbart News, an outlet that Yiannopolous works for, may have been involved in the riots to smear the protesters.

As backed up by the members who actually live there: [QUOTE="CaptHayfever, post: 1620976, member: 25169"]^No, but it's a problem that some places, including Berkeley, have had before; anarchist groups called "black blocs" walk onto open campuses in cities & hijack peaceful student demonstrations to cause mayhem. They don't support the protesters, but they're also not opposing infiltrators either; they're only there to wreck stuff.[/QUOTE] And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[QUOTE="CaptHayfever, post: 1621356, member: 25169"]That isn't the narrative, but good job disproving a theory that no one was touting in the first place.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"[/QUOTE]
I had communicated that I wouldn't find it surprising as a possibility, and that we could not responsibly conclude anything about the politics or allegiance of any rioters and their legitimacy among the organised protestors. Trump's personal comments regarding his desire to defund a University over cancelling an event due to rioting certainly paints a picture of pre-determined blame.

I muttered 'light as a board, stiff as a feather' for 2 days straight and now I've ascended, ;aughing at olympus and zeus is crying

CaptHayfever, post: 1621408, member: 25169 wrote:As backed up by the members who actually live there: And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

The whole point of the black bloc tactic is to hide identity, so we wouldn't know that they were or weren't students, though we know that at least one staff member was involved, and there was organization here. If we apply Occam's razor here the best solution is that they were students though. No doubt people probably came from around to join in, but the fact is students and faculty would know better how to organize in this area to cause mayhem to this extent. We know at least one faculty member was involved.

Plus if you read the article I posted earlier and look at the group that was organizing to shut down the event, their "about us" section specifically states

Berkeley students, staff, faculty and community coming together to build resistance to Trump.

They sound responsible to me. Common sense dictated as much before knowledge that any faculty and organization came to light because there have been violent leftist protests since before Trump was even elected.

A few things, in my opinion that I believe is happening with these protests and events:

1) It's open for everyone. We saw the same thing happening in Ferguson and Occupy Wall Street - people who don't even live there or attend going in there to rile up stuff. Because then they can go blame it on the protestors and hide behind a crowd. Because people are dip****s like that. these movement(s) have no leader, no rules, no enforcements. Anyone can go in, infest a movement, introduce ridiculous ideas of the movement, shout over the movement and become their unofficial "Voice", and destroy it - cause who's going to take it seriously when you're seeing something totally bizarre for it. And....

2) It seems like protestors don't get any attention unless they're tipping cars and looting stores. I remember the protests of the Bush Era and how most never made it past local news. (Partly cause they were quarantined into "Free speech zones" far far away from the event and most importantly, the cameras.) hell the only time some did was when the police tazed someone - and the outcry was nowhere near like what it would be today. Our media thrives too much on calamity and controversy because otherwise, people are just going to go watch something else. A crowd of people holding up signs and talking about calling the representatives? Yawn. People tipping over cars and chanting "Not my president"? Now THAT's a story! Animal Rights activists working to rescue dogs from Puppy Mills and working to shut down dogfighting rings? It'll be lucky to make it past local news. Animal Rights activists throwing blood on people eating at KFC? TONIGHT! On the ten o clock news! Environmental activists organising a "Clean up the river"? Footnote in the municipal papers if at all. Environmental activists lighting cars on fire to protest a nuclear power plant? You bet your bottom it'll make it out of the papers.

[QUOTE="My Potions Are Too Strong For You Traveller, post: 1620922, member: 25415"]After having looked into his background, I would say that it seems (like others in recent memory) his words at face value are not conventionally dangerous, but he is surrounded by and incites a group fixated on attacking the people he names, and was apparently involved in doxing and is largely ascribed for inciting anger, likely intentionally.

[image]
What a nice guy.[/QUOTE]

Can confirm. Milo is a tool. His m.o, wehther he intends it or not (Which is freaking hard to tell...) is basically to just incite others to start doing things, then smugly say "You can't blame ME for it! I didn't do ****! Blame THEM, not ME." When he came around to my campus, nobody protested (This was before he got his reputation.. or where he wasn't as well-known.) but pretty much all he did was "Feminism is cancer" and spent a good 10 minutes whining about feminism... whereas the other speaker (I dunno if she was somners or not) started talking about other things. He's just a typical bully, goes and riles people, then when the teacher's looking, screams how he is the victim.

^
The thing is it's already been established the organized group that went in with the direct intention to shut down the event described themselves as students and faculty, along with a faculty member already being identified as a rioter.

Really? I recently watched his latest talk in New Mexico and he came off as well informed generally speaking. The only time he's an ass to people directly in talks is if they're an ass to him, (which modern feminists have been jerks to him since he first got recognition at all back during gamergate.) However as long as noone interrupts the actual speech ahead of the q&a and waits he will hear them out and let them speak even if he disagrees. His main thing is free speech above all else. He even disagreed when people on the right were saying left-wing college students who burnt a flag should be jailed.

I've NEVER heard him incite ANYONE to anything, and you'd be hard pressed to find an actual example.
It's another narrative people spread to discredit their political opponents. How do I know? Because the only example someone can actually bring up ever is the one where he got banned for supposedly "inciting people to attack Leslie Jones" by pointing out that her movie sucked, then calling her illiterate when she said she hoped he got banned. The only other thing was she was complaining about racist memes people tweeted at her claiming she was being attacked, and he replied that "Everyone gets hate-mail FFS" which is true especially for celebrities online.

(Also funfact later that week after he was banned Leslie Jones literally told her fans to go attack someone ending the tweet with "GET HER" yet she didn't get banned or eve suspended)

Also, he isn't to blame for what his followers on Twitter or anywhere do. He doesn't incite anyone to violence or anything like that, and the fact is any media personality shouldn't be held responsible for what their followers do.
If they were we would have to blame people like Sean King for the incitements all over Twitter to kill cops by extreme BLM supporters.

Heck I like the examples Milo himself gave in an interview when he said, "Is Justin Bieber responsible for when young girls cut themselves with the hashtag #cutforbieber? Is Beyonce responsible for her fans when they go after One Directioners with death threats and rape threats? Of course not."

Heck I like the examples Milo himself gave in an interview when he said, "Is Justin Bieber responsible for when young girls cut themselves with the hashtag #cutforbieber? Is Beyonce responsible for her fans when they go after One Directioners with death threats and rape threats? Of course not."

This comparison is beyond ridiculous. Milo actively supports and encourages what his followers do. Cut for Beiber was made by trolls.

He targeted a student which in my opinion is wrong and he shouldn't have, he DID NOT incite attacks against them.
He used them as an example to point out what he saw as a flawed ruling. Again I don't think he should've spoken about a student, but he did not incite violence or attacks against them. At worst he pointed out that she wasn't passing as a woman.
Heck even your headline says he mocks them. That is not the same thing as inciting attacks.
-
Example of him encouraging people to attack others?